Skip to main content

Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: Hub of Hip Date: Jul 28, 2004 11:16pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Pitching My Idea on the Star-Based Ratings

I think that a lot of people want to leave the reviewing to those who know best - many people here just don't have the breadth of knowledge to leave a truly educated review...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: glenn Date: Jul 31, 2004 10:10am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: Pitching My Idea on the Star-Based Ratings

Good point.I've been a Grateful Dead fan for 3 decades,but I still feel a bit reluctant to rate a dead show unless I was there and can compare the experience to the recording, or unless one of my favorite songs is on there, and I might want to say something along the lines of "Playin>Uncle John's>Morning Dew>Uncle John's>Playin" was the best I have heard.

I think it would be nice to be able to review a show without giving it a star rating. Or maybe a 10 star system, because, really, most music I would listen to all the way through would have to be 4 or 5 out of 5 or I'd turn it off.

five stars to me works out as:
* as bad as it can get.
** bad
*** exactly average
**** good
***** as good as it could be
this doesn't seem to be enough range. Are fractions of stars possible?

I ignore reviews that don't have much descriptive text, the stars don't mean much to me. I think it would be better to have a scale of 1-100, and instead of stars, a meter that is red from 0-33, yellow from 34 to 66, and green from 67 - 99... at 100 the meter would have a little golden twinkle on it and only the very very best stuff would get the twinkle, because it would have to have 100% of it's ratings to be 100... woo hoo, fancy.

But I can live with this system...

This post was modified by glenn on 2004-07-31 17:10:10